Another merit metric that could be considered in ranking.

[Gyfts]

I don't understand the obsession of making it harder to rank up on the forum. There's been so many suggestions of ideas that unnecessarily complicate the merit system and make it more difficult to rank up as if it isn't already difficult. If you are a newbie starting off and actually contribute to the forum, your chance of making it to legendary are pretty slim despite contributions of constructive posts because people don't tend to merit newer members, including myself. I've mentioned this in a previous post, but sending merit to someone is an endorsement of their content so sending merit to a newbie is banking on the fact that the person isn't a scammer or shitposter. Not many notable members are going to take that risk nor should they.

There needs to be a combination of a ranking system involving merit and activity but also a system where they can act independently to rank up. Having an activity requirement on top of a merit requirement to rank up is tough and forces people to only post content that's popular enough to earn merit on certain boards. I get that if you don't want aged accounts being able to rank up by spamming you would need to have some merit requirement. In that case, I don't think it'd be a bad idea to lower the merits needed. If you're an already established member that posts quality content, you're going to earn plenty of merit because you're a popular user. Anyone below that is going to get the short end of the stick.

[1714803507]

1714803507

[1714803507]

1714803507

[1714803507]

1714803507

[1714803507]

1714803507

[hilariousetc]

At first I thought this was going to be a thread about having another rank for high merit receivers. I do like the idea of a new rank for the top-earners, especially when becoming legendary is far too common these days.

I think you guys are reading more into my suggestion than I intended. I wasn't suggesting that you had to receive merits on all boards to rank up, but more that rank improvement should be harder if all of your merits were earned on a single board. The requirement to receive merits from a variety of awarders was intended to try to avoid upranking members of spamming groups, and not to create a "classist" forum

I think ranking up is already difficult enough and there's no need to over-complicate it further, but you could do something with this on the proposed reward badges ie once a person has got x amount of merit from a certain board they get a little badge related to that section. You could also do something with the reports once a user has reported x amount in that sub. Not sure how difficult it would be to implement but it would be nice to see rewards and badges for certain things, especially reporting which doesn't really come with any benefits currently and is a thankless task.

I don't understand the obsession of making it harder to rank up on the forum. There's been so many suggestions of ideas that unnecessarily complicate the merit system and make it more difficult to rank up as if it isn't already difficult. If you are a newbie starting off and actually contribute to the forum, your chance of making it to legendary are pretty slim despite contributions of constructive posts because people don't tend to merit newer members, including myself. I've mentioned this in a previous post, but sending merit to someone is an endorsement of their content so sending merit to a newbie is banking on the fact that the person isn't a scammer or shitposter. Not many notable members are going to take that risk nor should they.

Agreed. It is difficult, especially for average or even good posters. You probably basically have to be an exceptional poster to rank up to a higher rank within a reasonable time-frame. I still think we should implement more donor ranks like Silver/Gold Member with the added benefits of becoming a higher rank all but in name (you wouldn't literally become a Senior or Hero but get the benefits of becoming one ie a bigger signature and avatar etc). I think this would stop a lot of people needlessly fishing for merits and I'm sure a lot of people would prefer to cough up a bit of money to 'skip the queue' as it were. Give the money to charity if the forum doesn't need it and then it's win win.

[Jet Cash]

Having an activity requirement on top of a merit requirement to rank up is tough and forces people to only post content that's popular enough to earn merit on certain boards.

This is why I made the suggestion. In fact the fault lies with the merit awarders, who are creating this popularity, and obscuring some of the threads that support the original purpose of Bitcoin Talk. Some merit sources state that they don't have enough merits to reward all of the posts they would like to, and other sources state that they can't find posts to reward.

Bitcoin, crypto and world economies are going through some very radical changes, and it would be great if this was a forum to discuss these. Unfortunately, the significant topics don't attract contributions from the movers and shakers, and all we seem to be able to do is to post links to their YouTube videos, and topics in other media reports.

Most of the replies seem to  be focused on increasing the difficulty in ranking, but my main point is the need to move away from the obsession with the structure of BT, and to encourage and reward discussion about the world outside BT.

[Gyfts]

This is why I made the suggestion. In fact the fault lies with the merit awarders, who are creating this popularity, and obscuring some of the threads that support the original purpose of Bitcoin Talk. Some merit sources state that they don't have enough merits to reward all of the posts they would like to, and other sources state that they can't find posts to reward.

I don't know who the merit sources are but notable users that have tons of merit usually have long logs of merit they've sent in the last 120 days. Problem is that merit is being assigned to exceptional users/posting quality and not to those who post "good enough" which creates a disparity. I don't think you should be stuck at full member or Sr. member for 4 years because you aren't exceptional. Now, to be clear, I don't think you should earn merit for posting just "good enough" but rather merit should be given for exceptional posting. This is why I believe there needs to be some other aspect or metric involved in ranking up apart from earning merit to users who aren't necessarily exceptional. Another issue that arises is that we can't control what boards merit sources or merit givers browse, nor should we. This again will create disparities in where merit is assigned. Someone posting in Bitcoin discussion might not get the same exposure versus someone posting in Meta. This seemed to be a problem in local boards as well but has gotten better with more merit sources. Nonetheless, the issue still exists.

Most of the replies seem to  be focused on increasing the difficulty in ranking, but my main point is the need to move away from the obsession with the structure of BT, and to encourage and reward discussion about the world outside BT.

Fair enough. I'm with you here.

Agreed. It is difficult, especially for average or even good posters. You probably basically have to be an exceptional poster to rank up to a higher rank within a reasonable time-frame. I still think we should implement more donor ranks like Silver/Gold Member with the added benefits of becoming a higher rank all but in name (you wouldn't literally become a Senior or Hero but get the benefits of becoming one ie a bigger signature and avatar etc). I think this would stop a lot of people needlessly fishing for merits and I'm sure a lot of people would prefer to cough up a bit of money to 'skip the queue' as it were. Give the money to charity if the forum doesn't need it and then it's win win.

Definitely agree with adding more donor ranks as long as there is a timely pathway for members to earn the same benefits free. More revenue for the forum while members who want to contribute get to reap the benefits.

[Jet Cash]

I agree that good active contributors should be rewarded, and I try to do this whenever I can. Several other sources do this as well, and this is why you may see a block of merits being awarded to a post which may not warrant the award. It is to encourage the poster. I think TMAN was called to task for doing this when he bulked an award for a dozen posts into a single post. The problem is that it is quite time consuming to keep checking post history, and I've now got someone helping me by suggesting members that I should check for regular quality contributions.

[LoyceV]

sending merit to someone is an endorsement of their content so sending merit to a newbie is banking on the fact that the person isn't a scammer or shitposter. Not many notable members are going to take that risk nor should they.

Merit isn't necessarily an endorsement. For Newbies, it's enough for me if the post shows a real interest. I usually check for plagiarism, and if looks legit, I Merit them. I think I'm doing a good job selecting Newbies who aren't spammers. In the last 180 days, I've only sent 3 Merit to users who are now banned (Lol: theymos leads that list with 145 Merit).

[philipma1957]

Having an activity requirement on top of a merit requirement to rank up is tough and forces people to only post content that's popular enough to earn merit on certain boards.

This is why I made the suggestion. In fact the fault lies with the merit awarders, who are creating this popularity, and obscuring some of the threads that support the original purpose of Bitcoin Talk. Some merit sources state that they don't have enough merits to reward all of the posts they would like to, and other sources state that they can't find posts to reward.

Bitcoin, crypto and world economies are going through some very radical changes, and it would be great if this was a forum to discuss these. Unfortunately, the significant topics don't attract contributions from the movers and shakers, and all we seem to be able to do is to post links to their YouTube videos, and topics in other media reports.

Most of the replies seem to  be focused on increasing the difficulty in ranking, but my main point is the need to move away from the obsession with the structure of BT, and to encourage and reward discussion about the world outside BT.

I would merit this  but you don't need any points.  I  do not look at every  section.

It is time consuming.  I speak only english  so if I merit it will be for a post in english.

I used to try to read and merit in bitcoin discussion  very hard to merit there as many threads are created to make signature payments.
I don't actively trade so trading becomes hard to read and merit.
I have some time today to poke around some other spots to try and give away points.

[Jet Cash]

I don't actively trade so trading becomes hard to read and merit.

I've developed my own trading system. It is a combination of HODLing and scalping based on wicks. If I could think of a catchy name for it, then I might start a thread for discussion. I can't use "jet" in the name, as it isn't a get rich quick system, but it is a slow way to build your Bitcoin pile without any risk ( in my opinion ).

[Kalemder]

Bad idea. It will end up with people posting on boards they don't like because they need 4 "Beginners board Merits" for the next rank, while they have enough "Altcoin board Merits" already.
Let's not do that. All Merits are equal!

I agree with your opinion. A Turkish proverb says: Each lion roars in its own dumpster. or "The power of the lion becomes evident from where it sleeps."
I mean; Each user is strong in their own section.

Merits should be equal, just as every idea is equal...

[hosseinimr93]

If you are a newbie starting off and actually contribute to the forum, your chance of making it to legendary are pretty slim despite contributions of constructive posts because people don't tend to merit newer members, including myself.

I agree that it's more difficult for a newbie to earn merit. But it's completely normal. The newbie should prove himself first. For example a newbie register and posts some statistic at his first post should't get merit.

If a same post is made by a newbie and a user with more than 2000 merit, most of the times, the newbie has lower chance to earn merit. It's not just because the merit sender thinks that the poster might be a scammer. A post made by a user with +2000 merit is read much more than the post made by a newbie. Some users (including me) might skip a post made by a newbie when they don't have much time to real all posts. But this problem can be solved very soon if the user proves himself.

In my opinion, there is no need to make it more difficult or more easy to rank up. The current system is good enough. Even if there is any problem (I don't think there is a big problem), that's with how smerits are spent not with the system.
I have seen many newbies (especially in beginners & help and Bitcoin Technical Support boards) earn merit only for asking a question. Maybe that's not enough and we need more merit sources focus on low ranked members. Maybe Instead of threads asking how to earn merit we need some threads discussing how to spend smerits.
Generally, I think most of merit sources are doing their work well and all newbies have big chance to become a legendary.

[libert19]

there are users who became hero members just by posting in their local board, you'd rarely see them in other boards (unless participating in bounty). I somewhat agree.

[Rikafip]

there are users who became hero members just by posting in their local board, you'd rarely see them in other boards

Nothing wrong with that. If someone feels better and more confident writing only in his native language, and even rank up, so be it.

Generally, forcing people to write on boards they know little about, or have no interest in is a bad idea, as it can only ruin it for those seriously interested in the topics. This problem is very obvious in gambling board, where bunch of members write about stuff they know nothing about, just to meet post quota for their signature campaign. Making post that makes sense in topic you know little about is already hard, imagine if you have to get some merit for that..

[TheBeardedBaby]

I think this metric could be used in a different way.

Let's say you got 500 merit from the Bitcoin Technical Support section. Then add a custom title, Bitcoin Tech& Support master.

So everyone who had acquired more than 500 merits in a single section can be displayed as custom title or something like this.

[hd49728]

It reminds us to rethink of how users became merit sources.

- Automatically allocated by the admin since 24 Jan 2018.
- Merit sources who applied for all boards, and they did not emphasize which boards they will focus to distributed sourced-merits.
- Merit sources who applied for limited boards, who will try to keep promises and distribute their sourced-merits on boards they promised to focus on when applied.

Merit-deserving posts are always deserving ones (they are good posts), whatsoever boards they posted on. It is only difference between merit-sources and how they do their works.

It is unrealistic to require all sources to decentralize their sourced-merits over all boards on the forum.

[LoyceV]

So everyone who had acquired more than 500 merits in a single section can be displayed as custom title or something like this.

So I'll be:

• Meta Master
• Reputation Master

The former will piss off ch, the latter fits my Switzerland-image. But please don't This list will eventually get very long for many users.

[Jet Cash]

Why do people always have to assume extremes. If all you ever read are books on Rat Rods, then you are going to miss out on a lot of life. Conversely, you can have a rewarding and fulfilling life, even if you have never heard of a Rat Rod.

My point is that you should find the best threads in four or five of the boards here, and not spend all of your time in one corner.

[philipma1957]

Why do people always have to assume extremes. If all you ever read are books on Rat Rods, then you are going to miss out on a lot of life. Conversely, you can have a rewarding and fulfilling life, even if you have never heard of a Rat Rod.

My point is that you should find the best threads in four or five of the boards here, and not spend all of your time in one corner.

I think instead of down grading merits to encourage people to post in multiple boards.

If the idea was to use a multiple for many board merit earner people would accept it as a good idea.

Ie. merits earn rank exactly like they do now so a one board merit earner gets a multiple of 1 for his merits.

since merits would rank up exactly like they do that one board guy would not be punished.

A 2 board merit earner gets 5 free merits.
A 3 board merit earner gets 10 free merits.
A 4 board merit earner gets  15 free merits.
A 5 board merit earner gets 25 free merits.

so on and so forth.

Thus no punishment for the specialist one or two board merit earner.

And a reward for guys like me that have merits in a lot of boards.

Since

1000 merits still make a legend
  500 merits still make a hero
  250 merits still make a senior member

this variation of your idea 💡 is simply all win win. no stick just carrot 🥕.

[AicecreaME]

I think you guys are reading more into my suggestion than I intended. I wasn't suggesting that you had to receive merits on all boards to rank up, but more that rank improvement should be harder if all of your merits were earned on a single board. The requirement to receive merits from a variety of awarders was intended to try to avoid upranking members of spamming groups, and not to create a "classist" forum.

I agree to this. What's @Jetcash trying to imply here is that we need to be more considerate, or I would use the term "flexible" when it comes in giving merits. For example, person A is a person who is a genius, whose grades are always top notch, and then there is person B, whose grades are just average. Person A would not see person's B opinion or suggestion interesting most of the time, because their level of understanding have a very huge gap, so what's happening right now in the forum is pretty much discrimination, instead of helping those in needs, they are ignoring them.

Please don't get me wrong here, I am not saying that we should give merits freely, of course we need to choose on who are deserves it, my point is, if a post does not help you, that doesn't mean that it is not helpful to the other members of this forum, to make this short, exploring all the thread (if possible) will gives you the idea that even in the "spam threads", there are still a lot of good quality posters that are helping others but being ignored because they post on a thread where you treat it as a "spam threads"